Clark’s article was titled “Teacher credentialing should include mental health training.” First thought was anyone going through the credentialing process probably could use a little mental health help.

The article doesn’t cover that though. Without naming the research, Clark states that “One in five young people experience significant emotional distress each year, according to a UC San Francisco study.” You’ll have to do the research yourself to see if there is research that supports this, as Clark doesn’t elaborate any more than that.

What he proposes is that educators, especially new ones, should learn about and be able to recognize issues that lead to mental health problems. He correctly states that teachers work with rather diverse and multi-cultural groups of children every day.

He’s also right on target when he says that early intervention pays off in regards to mental health issues. Catching a problem early is always better than later. The thought that teachers should be doing this, however, is questionable, at best.

All teachers have stories, some entertaining, others just downright horrible, of what children have done in the classroom. In the course of a day, teachers, especially of young children, know that just about anything can happen.

A little clarity here: teachers are taught to teach and manage classrooms. That’s what the credential says. Specialities exist for special ed, special day, reading and so on, which require master’s degrees. Admin credentials are different too, and require a master’s degree.

There is nothing in the normal credential that qualifies the average teacher to do anything other than teach. When children act out consistently in class, teachers refer the child to a student study team, or some such group, as a first step. After that, perhaps the school psychologist becomes involved.

A school psychologist is not a psychologist. They hold a master’s degree in school psychology. They are experts in psychometry, a fancy word for testing. They are not treaters. This is important to know if you have children in school.

Licensed clinical psychologists have PhD’s. Licensed clinical social workers have master’s degrees. Both have passed appropriate board license exams that qualify them to treat a wide array of disorders.

Now, after the school psychologist gets involved, tests are administered, some direction for controlling behaviours have been done, and nothing improves, then the child might get referred to a real psychologist, or even a psychiatrist, who is an M.D.

All of this is to say that there is already a working system in place. The appropriate steps, through the appropriate people, are taken. It doesn’t require another layer of cost and paperwork.

To think that teachers, within a credential, can take a class that gives them the tools to diagnose anything that is rightfully in the domain of those who have the appropriate licenses and degrees, is absurd.

It’s already just plain weird when teachers think that someone may be a bit off the bubble. To believe that we could ever diagnose a mental health issue, which may go into a students permanent file, with such minimal training, is disturbing.

Makes me wonder how the finances of Clarks proposal would be. Follow the money. Always follow the money.

Let’s not get teachers involved in any more than we (yes, I’m retired, but still a teacher) already have to do in the classrooms. While Clark thinks he has a really good idea, in reality it sounds like a nightmare.